AE Land and AI Issues [OUTDATED]

[Andy Mac]

Note to self take another look at Cover for North PI

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

[:D][:D][:D] I think terrible is an overstatement we did a lot of work to get it right if a few units are in the wrong locations we can move them but it wont be mateiral to the game.

I think "terrible" as used by Jeff is an expression of the Ozzie brashness that others discussed elsewhere...it isn't meant as being rude....but sometimes we other Anglo/Saxons have a difficult time understanding it....not sure i expressed myself well here probably "lost in translation"

[Andy Mac]

Thats ok Treespider I am not that thinskinned - anyway I was at lords for the last day to watch the Aussies get thrashed so I am oblivious to all taunts from down under for at least the next 5 days !!!

[John Lansford]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Based on John L's feedback I need to up the ASW TF's between Camran Bay and Malaya and maybe off north PI

Oh, you're thinking MY subs aren't being found by ASW TF's? No, it's the other way around; I can't find any Japanese subs! My subs on the routes around Camranh Bay and north of the PI's are being attacked, just unsuccessfully for the most part. I think I had one get hit by a depth charge so far (in an invasion hex, shallow water) and one shot up by a merchant ship/Q-ship, but have had several ASW contacts with my subs.

No, I'm wondering where the Japanese subs are.

[JSBoomer]

ooops

[JSBoomer]

ORIGINAL: Blackhorse

ORIGINAL: J Boomer

No... It would seem Andy Mac that you are right and I am wrong. I was very suprised to learn that the current Militia Brigade group names come from old formations. Though like today these formations may have been more administrative than anything. Thanks for getting me to dig further into our own history.

Jordan,

You'd be contributing to the AE effort if you could find the names of the Brigadiers or Colonels who led those militia brigades during the war. We have the names of the historic commanders for the regular Canadian Army brigades (and even some other units, like the Victoria Forts) but not the militia units. PM me if you have access to that information, thanks!

I'll check out the Provincial Archives here in town and there is a couple other avenues I can check. I'll send you a PM if I find anything.

[fbs]

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: fbs

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Reverse case for 6677 - Rosyth and Plymouth Fortress and 6678 - Falklands Fortress. They are set as a coastal defense unit but only have engineers and aviation support. I guess it should either receive some 12" guns (for Rosyth) and something for the Falklands, or change them to engineer unit.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[fbs]

Scenario 002.

Units 121 III Corps, 153 IV Corps, 120 Alaska Defense Cmd. None of them have a TO&E.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: fbs

ORIGINAL: fbs

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Reverse case for 6677 - Rosyth and Plymouth Fortress and 6678 - Falklands Fortress. They are set as a coastal defense unit but only have engineers and aviation support. I guess it should either receive some 12" guns (for Rosyth) and something for the Falklands, or change them to engineer unit.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Light guns (6pdrs = 57mm ish) and 40 mm bofors. Seems we only stuck big guns to guard straits (Dover, Singapore etc). The threat was perceived to be E-Boats and other light craft that may have evaded the complex minefields etc, so guns were positioned appropriate to the threat.

[fbs]

A few more oddities:

Unit 5712 has 4 garrison units, but TO&E doesn't have them. So if this unit is attacked and the 4 garrison units are destroyed, the unit suddenly changes from static to mobile. I'd say better add the 4 garrison units to the TO&E.

Unit 5608 has 0x 90mm gun and 0x 16" CD guns on the TO&E; similarly 5600 SF Harbor has 0x 90mm gun. Better remove them, as quantity of 0 does nothing for the TO&E.

[bsq]

ORIGINAL: fbs

A few more oddities:

...

Unit 5608 has 0x 90mm gun and 0x 16" CD guns on the TO&E; similarly 5600 SF Harbor has 0x 90mm gun. Better remove them, as quantity of 0 does nothing for the TO&E.

Doesn't this allow them to be retrofitted as soon as spares are produced. Fitted for but not with is a fairly common military phrase - so perhaps 0x ?? equates to the mount and the emplacement?

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: bsq

ORIGINAL: fbs

ORIGINAL: fbs

An engineer unit with no engineers: scenario 002, unit 5712 (Fort Lewis); should be Coastal Defense, but it is set as Engineer Unit even if it doesn't have a single engineer on the TO&E. Also 5714 Fort Ord, and 5713 Camp Adair; there are probably a few more in this situation.

Also B/C/D Det USN Port Svc; I don't know which type they should be, but they are set as Engineer Unit with no engineers.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Reverse case for 6677 - Rosyth and Plymouth Fortress and 6678 - Falklands Fortress. They are set as a coastal defense unit but only have engineers and aviation support. I guess it should either receive some 12" guns (for Rosyth) and something for the Falklands, or change them to engineer unit.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

Light guns (6pdrs = 57mm ish) and 40 mm bofors. Seems we only stuck big guns to guard straits (Dover, Singapore etc). The threat was perceived to be E-Boats and other light craft that may have evaded the complex minefields etc, so guns were positioned appropriate to the threat.

Agreed, some 6 pounders would look good.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[Barb]

Naval AI for Aleutian scenario isnt very smart.
Played as Allies, got CVE Nassau, 3 old BBs, 4CAs, 4CLs. Japanese got Shokaku, Zuikaku, one CVL, Musashi, cca 10 CAs.

Only thing that left Paramushiro except submarines was small convoy of 2 xAK and E.
1. Why is this japanese stuff there? They were supposed to go to Aleutians but Attu fell and operation was recalled. Shouldnt be there.
2. If they are supposed to be there, shouldnt they cruise around? With all that force Japan could easily take Adak and sink whatever allies have.
3. I have been sailing here and there around Attu for two weeks with - Japs got plenty of spottings. Only thing that showed up were Betties and subs.

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: bsq

ORIGINAL: fbs

A few more oddities:

...

Unit 5608 has 0x 90mm gun and 0x 16" CD guns on the TO&E; similarly 5600 SF Harbor has 0x 90mm gun. Better remove them, as quantity of 0 does nothing for the TO&E.

Doesn't this allow them to be retrofitted as soon as spares are produced. Fitted for but not with is a fairly common military phrase - so perhaps 0x ?? equates to the mount and the emplacement?

These units have no 16" or 90mm guns, and with 0x on the TO&E they have no way of acquiring any either, so I reckon that the 0x entry does nothing (even if the 90mm guns upgrade to something, the quantity will still be 0x).

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[Andy Mac]

Not required off map bases are immune to invasion so the base forces are only there for air and naval support

[Andy Mac]

90mm TOE is a flow through to an upgrade to the TOE in June 43

[Andy Mac]

If Tacoma is invaded having the unit retreat is the least of the issues the players will have !!!

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Not required off map bases are immune to invasion so the base forces are only there for air and naval support

Right, so they should be changed from coastal defense to engineering units. My point is that it makes little sense to call an unit coastal defense if it has no guns -- so either give them guns or change the type. As the units actually represent off-map engineering resources, change of type may work better.

Cheers [:D]
fbs

[Andy Mac]

AI on Aleutians noted will take another look